Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Mr. Mohd. Idris Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Adj.)

Mr. Mohd. Idris vs Commissioner of Customs (Adj.)

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Apr 30, 2003
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/30751

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
FERA

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

FERA

Key legal issue
FERA

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mr. Mohd. Idris

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs (Adj.)

Excerpt

1. the application for early hearing of the above appeal against the order of the commissioner of customs inter-alia confiscating toyota lexus car, confirming differential duty and imposing penalty is allowed as the applicant/importer is an individual (sic) his car has been in the custody of the department since import in 2000. connected appeal no. e/1538-1539/2000 are also directed to be listed together with the above appeal. all three appeals to come up on 24.7.2003.

Full Judgment

1. The application for early hearing of the above appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Customs inter-alia confiscating Toyota Lexus Car, confirming differential duty and imposing penalty is allowed as the applicant/importer is an individual (SIC) his car has been in the custody of the department since import in 2000. Connected appeal No. E/1538-1539/2000 are also directed to be listed together with the above appeal. All three appeals to come up on 24.7.2003.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial